Castanet

OnTheRoadAgain wrote:Good luck with that one. WFN runs their own courts of law, outside BC supreme court.

Westbank First Nation is a self-governing nation. The Westbank First Nation Self-Government Act (Bill C-11) received Royal Assent in Ottawa and became law on May 6, 2004. The Order-In-Council bringing WFN Self-Government into force took place on April 1, 2005.

Westbank First Nation has its own law governing landlord-tenant matters called the Residential Premises Law or RPL. The Provincial Residential Tenancy Act does not apply on WFN lands. Although similar in many respects, the two laws differ in a number of significant ways and it is important that both landlords and tenants understand their rights and responsibilities under the WFN law.

The RPL is administered by the Residential Premises Administrator. One of the primary roles of the Administrator is to educate and advise landlords and tenants regarding the RPL and is available to do so either by phone, email or in person. As well, all of the forms required to be used under the RPL are accessible below.

The Administrator is also responsible for managing the dispute resolution system established by the RPL. If a landlord and tenant cannot settle a matter between them, the RPL provides that either may initiate an arbitration process. These arbitrations are conducted by trained and experienced third-party arbitrators and their decisions are binding upon the parties.

Disneyland wrote:

OnTheRoadAgain wrote:Good luck with that one. WFN runs their own courts of law, outside BC supreme court.

Where do you get your information? That is such a crock, and you post stuff like this! Not so long ago there was an issue with one of the towers over by the Dolphins, a leaning tower. Should the City of Kelowna have fixed that? I am sure every taxpayer in the City of Kelowna would have had an issue with that one. I get tried of people spouting BS on these forums and continually taking shots at WFN with no facts or substance to what they say. Copper Sky went into recievership and the receiver is now the owner and has to assume responsiblity for the defects. The receiver will have to go after the engineers and architects that signed off on the pool and the wall, its called "Professional Reliance".

OnTheRoadAgain wrote:http://www.wfn.ca/government.htm

Westbank First Nation is a self-governing nation. The Westbank First Nation Self-Government Act (Bill C-11) received Royal Assent in Ottawa and became law on May 6, 2004. The Order-In-Council bringing WFN Self-Government into force took place on April 1, 2005.

http://www.wfn.ca/residentenant.htm

Westbank First Nation has its own law governing landlord-tenant matters called the Residential Premises Law or RPL. The Provincial Residential Tenancy Act does not apply on WFN lands. Although similar in many respects, the two laws differ in a number of significant ways and it is important that both landlords and tenants understand their rights and responsibilities under the WFN law.

The RPL is administered by the Residential Premises Administrator. One of the primary roles of the Administrator is to educate and advise landlords and tenants regarding the RPL and is available to do so either by phone, email or in person. As well, all of the forms required to be used under the RPL are accessible below.

The Administrator is also responsible for managing the dispute resolution system established by the RPL. If a landlord and tenant cannot settle a matter between them, the RPL provides that either may initiate an arbitration process. These arbitrations are conducted by trained and experienced third-party arbitrators and their decisions are binding upon the parties.

If you are denied an appeal process with WFN you can apply to the Supreme Court of BC for a Judicial Review. That judge may make a different decision, but the only place he can send this decision is back to WFN to have another look. It is very likely they will not comply. The supreme court judges have no jurisdiction to make decisions for non natives living on WFN land.

Ari Gold wrote:The article says that there is a problem with the retaining wall? Is it referring to the giant Allen (gravity) block wall along Old Okanagan Highway?

I couldn't beleive when they put that up. Even properly laid and drained with the soil mesh, it's just a bunch of blocks stacked on top of each other. no mortar or concrete!

They're great for walls a few feet high, but that wall is 15-20 feet high is some places

That isn't how block retaining walls work, the block is simply a facing, even when you see the large 5' x 2.5' concrete 'Lock Blocks' they aren't providing anything structural to the wall. It is the weight of the soil on the meshing that provides the stability. The soil itself doesn't cause the failure, it is when you cannot relieve the hydrostatic pressure when water gets into this backfill. They are built with a course of free draining rounded drain rock right behind the facing (a 'drainage chimney') that allows the water to get to the base of the wall where it is removed via a perforated drain pipe. If you cannot relieve this water pressure is where the problems come up.

This is why when (rarely) these walls do fail they always blow out at the bottom of the wall (see the overpass failure last year, it was the bottom panels where the wall blew out), as opposed to the wall simply 'falling down'.

Ditch Digger wrote:That isn't how block retaining walls work, the block is simply a facing, even when you see the large 5' x 2.5' concrete 'Lock Blocks' they aren't providing anything structural to the wall. It is the weight of the soil on the meshing that provides the stability. The soil itself doesn't cause the failure, it is when you cannot relieve the hydrostatic pressure when water gets into this backfill. They are built with a course of free draining rounded drain rock right behind the facing (a 'drainage chimney') that allows the water to get to the base of the wall where it is removed via a perforated drain pipe. If you cannot relieve this water pressure is where the problems come up.

This is why when (rarely) these walls do fail they always blow out at the bottom of the wall (see the overpass failure last year, it was the bottom panels where the wall blew out), as opposed to the wall simply 'falling down'.

Ditch Digger wrote:

Ari Gold wrote:The article says that there is a problem with the retaining wall? Is it referring to the giant Allen (gravity) block wall along Old Okanagan Highway?

I couldn't beleive when they put that up. Even properly laid and drained with the soil mesh, it's just a bunch of blocks stacked on top of each other. no mortar or concrete!

They're great for walls a few feet high, but that wall is 15-20 feet high is some places

That isn't how block retaining walls work, the block is simply a facing, even when you see the large 5' x 2.5' concrete 'Lock Blocks' they aren't providing anything structural to the wall. It is the weight of the soil on the meshing that provides the stability. The soil itself doesn't cause the failure, it is when you cannot relieve the hydrostatic pressure when water gets into this backfill. They are built with a course of free draining rounded drain rock right behind the facing (a 'drainage chimney') that allows the water to get to the base of the wall where it is removed via a perforated drain pipe. If you cannot relieve this water pressure is where the problems come up.

This is why when (rarely) these walls do fail they always blow out at the bottom of the wall (see the overpass failure last year, it was the bottom panels where the wall blew out), as opposed to the wall simply 'falling down'.

Ditch Digger wrote:For 3 courses and under. If you go over 4 blocks and aren't using bi-axial grid you are just asking for trouble.